About your Search

20121121
20121129
STATION
CNNW 5
LANGUAGE
English 15
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15
" for al qaeda. remember, the administration said she was working from edited talking points. the question is, who did the editing? today, the senators say that acting director morell told them the fbi did. they say they later heard from the cia that he had quote, misspoken and the cia was, in fact, responsible. so what's going on here? cnn intelligence correspondent suzanne kelly has been working her sources. she's joining us now. suzanne, you just got a statement from the cia. what are they saying? >> reporter: actually, i've gotten this statement from an intelligence official who told me it was in fact the cia that made the changes which is more or less what the intelligence community has been saying from the beginning, that this was a collaborative effort within the intelligence community to get their language straight and that the reasons they were doing it had to do with, as you know, classified sources. i can read you what the u.s. intelligence official has just told me. there were literally just coming in on my phone. there were several valid intelligence and investigatory reasons
it certainly was clear from the beginning that we knew that those with ties to al-qaeda were involved in the attack on the embassy, and clearly the impression that was given, the information given to the american people was wrong. in fact, ambassador rice said today, absolutely, it was wrong. megyn: joining us now, kelly ayotte, a republican senator from new hampshire who was part of those meetings today and whose sound bite you just heard. senator, welcome back to the program. >> thank you, megyn. megyn: all right, explain that for us, if you would. why are you more troubled today than you were before you met with ambassador rice? >> well, first of all, i appreciated that we had the meeting today, but i will say that up front the acting director of the cia and ambassador rice said that the story about the video and the protests was wrong. in fact, the acting director of the cia said by the 22nd of september they had absolutely confirmed that that was wrong, and so i think the first issue is having gone on every major news network and represented that story that she now admits is wron
on the attack. they sit was al qaeda and somebody changed that talking point. there was testimony late last week from former cia director david petraeus who we are told told the lawmakers the initial documents coming out of the cia was this ambush that killed the four americans in benghazi included the word terrorism and cited al qaeda. but someone changed the language. then we had congressman pete king say they questioned james clapper and all the intel heads on capitol hill about this and they all said we don't know who changed it. we don't know. the pressure is now on for answers because now you have got clapper coming out and saying it was me. but clapper was one of the ones saying i have no idea how it was. that led to intel community chairman mike rogers saying he wants an explanation from clapper himself. eli lake is a national security reporter. these weren't small players who went before capitol hill. it was clapper, it was the acting director of the cia, the head of the national counter terrorism center. and what pete king told us is they all said we don't know who took died out of the
. also this morning, defense secretary leon panetta spelling out the future against al qaeda, while speaking about the september 11th attacks at a washington-based think tank. he praised what's being done but he says there's still a lot of work left to do. >> we know we're going to be smaller. we're going to be leaner. it's a reality of coming out of these wars. but we have to be agile. we have to be deployable. we have to be flexible. and we have to be on the cutting edge of technology. >> panetta also talked about investing in cyberspace, unmanned systems for the future. also, former boxing champ hector macho camacho is recovering this morning, after being shot in his face in his native puerto rico. police say camacho and another man were just sitting in a car when someone opened fire. the second man was killed. the bullet caused damage to two vertebrae in camacho's neck. he is in serious condition but expected to survive. >>> a near-riot caught on camera at a city council meeting in newark, new jersey last night. take a look. listen to this. people there storming the stage after
to which clearly contradicted that. she also by the way said that al qaeda was disseminated along with ben laden being killed. al qaeda is not disseminated. al qaeda is roaring back in those parts of the middle east. >> bill: isn't she what washington is these day as bureaucrat? she does what she is told. she is a good soldier. she is going to be rewarded by the president with the secretary of state slot because she did his bidding. i think that's what this is, senator. >> i think that may be the view of the president of the united states. but, i think we are all responsible for what we say, particularly in positions of -- positions of responsibility to have all of the facts together before you tell the american people. and, by the way, this is also about the president of the united states who did not tell the people of this country, either did not know or didn't tell people as long as the 25th, two weeks later he was at the u.n., after being on "the view" and letterman saying that they didn't know what -- still saying that this was a hateful video that inspired. >> bill: he still hasn't e
. rice. >> as i understand it, the explanation is that that was being withheld, the al-qaeda involvement was -- that point of the talking points was being withheld for classified reasons, but i also explored didn't you question that because that left, if you were to omit that portion, it leaves a very different impression to the american people and frankly, i didn't get a satisfactory answer to that. >> bill: joining us from washington to react, fox news analyst charles krauthammer. so bigger mess now than it's ever been. here is my assessment based on what happened today. i'm going to go on the record. this is what i think is going to happen and you can tell me if i'm right or wrong in your opinion. i think that the white house and the obama reelection committee, all right, that means david axelrod, basically said that after the murder of the ambassador, they were going to tamp the story down so it didn't intrude on their narrative that the obama administration had decimated al-qaeda. so they ordered dr. rice, the ambassador to the u.n., to go out on the sunday shows and say that the st
that the attack was probably linked to an al qaeda group. are we any nearer to knowing the answer to that question? >> well, we have a process in place to find that out, and the senate intelligence committee has made very clear, and i made it clear in the meeting, that we want that whole process from a to z gone through, and who made what changes from the initial analysis done by the cia, we want to know who did what. i believe that the white house only changed one thing, and that was the word "consulate" to "mission." i do not believe that any part of the administration in the sense of the white house made any changes and we know when director petraeus came to the senate intelligence committee the day after the event and we happened to have a transcript of this, that he gave us his view that this was, in fact, a terrorist attack. but there was some reluctance of including one of the groups which was al qaeda. this is sort of a loose thing with people kind of knitting together quite possibly from three different groups, but it was an attack and there should be no doubt about that. nonetheless, sus
questions in the media. he says general petraeus * said the cia knew within 24 hours al qaeda was behind it but susan rice did not use that information on the talk shows saying the siege resulted from a spontaneous protest. last thursday clapper tells one story and now according to his spokesman its is just the opposite. do you think he is not still telling the truth? >> it's hard to know. it's the old quote. i'm not mad you lied to me. i'm mad i can't believe anything you tell me. this is the head our intelligence an changes his mind within 24 hours. today is the 70th day since four our fellow americans were murdered. we are talking about susan rice's career progression and james clapper's ability to keep a fact straight and desperate housewives having an affair with generals. gregg: and four people are dead. we are talking about a tragedy here. murdered by terrorists. in reference to james clapper, one story last week, now a different story. it's a crime to lie to congress. do you think a serious look at that needs to be undertaken by perhaps an independent prosecutor? >> it depends. i
was solely responsible for changes, including stripping out languages about al qaeda. to anyone who is listening, it was clear from general petraeus and others who testified last week that the talking points were amended to protect permission and subject to any political spending. the administration of the attack blamed a video or benghazi being attacked by terrorists. the one james clapper and whether he pressed it on the white house and others in the intelligence community, it is a question of did he do that at the direction of the white house? reporter: they want specifics on this new timeline. comments in response made by lawmakers or calls and e-mails were not responded to. jenna: catherine herridge, thank you so much. jon: the old fiscal cliff is still hanging out there. new perspective on the political implications. the risk for the president as well as democrats if lawmakers do not reach a deal. and it will cost you more to drive over to grandma's house for thanksgiving. plus, it is way beyond your control could make travel even more expensive. all coming up on "happening no
groups in libya. we did nothing to help them. as a result of that the al qaeda and those affiliated groups have undue influence and the benghazi debacle is a result of that. bill: can we do anything about that when you consider the politics operating internally within these countries? >> in my own mind there is plenty we can do. right now engage in libya and let's get a security force and let's start gaining some control in that country and pushing back on the radicals. let's choose a side on the war taking place in syria and start helping the moderate rebels. even the united kingdom is looking towards doing something like that. why sit on the fence and turn it over to the rad cat islamists and the al qaeda which may be the case. bill: there is a power vacuum in the world. that's clear to see. jack keane, i appreciate your analysis. martha: coming up, a lurid tale of money and murder as a woman goes on trial accused of defriending a jackpot -- befriending a jackpot winner. she conned him out of the money and then she killed them. the drama that's unfolding in court. >> i'm telling y
as the aircraft carrier "carl vinson" waits for the body of osama bin laden. it's may 2nd, 2011. the al qaeda leader's just been killed by navy s.e.a.l.s. in e-mails, two u.s. navy admirals used code words to describe bin laden. the commander of the carrier strike group says, fedex delivered the package, both trucks are safely en route, home base. the e-mails were just released in response to a lawsuit by the group judicial watch. a few days earlier, the question was asked, do i need any spiritual ceremonial preparations? "traditional procedures for islamic burial was followed. the deceased's body was washed and then placed in a white sheet. a military officer read prepared religious remarks which were translated into arabic by a native speaker, after the words were complete, the body was placed on a prepared flat board, tipped up, whereupon the deceased's body slid into the sea. according to the e-mails, there aren't many witnesses. in ponce response to this question, the heading of one e-mail says, burial, no sailors watched. another says, only a small group of the leadership was informed,
five days i get this is al-qaeda. i'm not going to go throughout and make myself look bad -- >> eric: why are the senators pulling back? >> dana: i have a reason. i don't know this for sure. gut instinct. if you read carl cannon of real clear politics, straight down the middle guy, touching on your thing how bizarre the story is and how they slid past it. i doesn't pass the smell test. i think the reason that the republican senators can back off if that is what they're doing is last week, national liberal columnist came out and said it's not just the benghazi thing. forget about that. she does not deserve a promotion based on performance. if you have that, then if you have that on the left, on the right you can let go a little bit. >> kimberly: quick, i want to bring this up. this is interesting. the coptic christian that is jailed for making the film, freedom of expression and not backing down on it. site of the 2009 massacre in fort hood, texas, prime example of the violence committed under the sign of allah. what do you make of the comments? >> eric: this guy is probably of the mo
. here is the thing the way i understand it. they pulled al-qaeda out of the talking points and pulled the protest out of the talking points and she still went with it. she still went with it and told the american people everything she was told to say. >> bob: learn how the process works. c.i.a. is one of a number of intelligence agencies that put talk points. they didn't have the agre agreement. she got factual in their view, intelligence community view of what happened. she gave it to the sunday talk show. she made a mistake and said she made a mistak miswhat more u ask for? do you think he is went up and there purposefully lied? >> brian: shouldn't you do your research? >> andrea: yes. she knew there were conflicting accounts. why push anyone from the administration out to say anything at all. she should have done her research. maybe she is not a liar. maybe she is incatch tent. one thing that the senator trying to block you. it was great what mccain did. getting the heat. and republicans were being sexist. and let me give her a fair shake. john bolton was up for administration. the
on the grave of bin laden proclaiming al qaeda debt and their only achievement in foreign policy saying over and over again want bin laden dead. after a way to fend off all attacks on otherwise speckled foreign policy they have the assassination of an ambassador first time in 30 years happening within a week and they have to find a cover story. >>> krauthammer saying it may not have been a deliberate brat conspiracy. as the story developed the white house saw a way to try to make it nonpolitical. no to stores you ca stories youk on. they have a little time before fiscal cliff. lack of progress. >> we are a little over four weeks away from the fiscal cliff and still no progress. there is a massive tax hike in spending cuts, it only intensifies on comments by harry read essentially confirming the budget talks still remain worlds apart. the dow down nearly 90 points. >> this will be a big topic in the future. college loan debt. that could be the next housing bubble. >> the federal lending making college education to any one is really only creating a pile of debt so large that since 2007 it has
carrier waits for the body of osama bin laden. it's may 2, 2011, the al qaeda leader has just been killed. two u.s. navy admirals use code words to describe bin laden. the commander says fed ex delivered the package, both trucks are safely on route home base. the e-mails heavily redakted have just been released by the defense department responding to a freedom of information act washdog. a few days earlier that strike dog asked do i need any special religious ceremonial preparations. after bin laden's buried at sea, an admiral describes the scene. tradition traditional procedures for islamic burial was followed. the deceased body was washed then placed in a white sheet then a military officer read prepared religious remarks which were translated into arabic. tipped up whereupon the deceased body slid into the sea. according to e-mails, there aren't many witnesses. in response to the question, any sailors watch the burial, burial, no sailors watched. and another says only a small group of the leadership was informed. less than a dozen total. and another indication of the secrecy of that pa
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15